Since there was no demand under section 28(8) of the Customs Act ...

Case Laws Customs

March 22, 2014

Since there was no demand under section 28(8) of the Customs Act for duty, no penalty could have been imposed under that provision and consequently the penalty under section 114A was not sustainable. - HC

View Source

← Previous Next →

Since there was no demand under section 28(8) of the Customs Act ...

Case Laws Customs

March 22, 2014

You may also like:

Since Appellant were paying the duty utilizing the CENVAT Credit they cannot be charged for contravention of the provisions of Rule 4, 8(1), 8(3) & 8(3A) of the Central...

Levy of Penalty u/s 112 - Scope of the show cause notice - The CESTAT noted that, no show cause notice has been issued proposing the demand of differential duty or the...

Penalty under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 - Contravention of Rule 8(3A) - penalty under Rule 25 is not permissible, but penalty under Rule 27 is to be imposed - AT

Contravention of Sections 8(1) and 9(1)(f)(i) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 - receiving foreign exchange payments in 1996-97 through fake export documents...

Levy of penalties u/ss 122 and 129 of CGST/SGST Acts - expiry of e-way bill - mens rea in penalty imposition. Technically, violation of law by petitioner in transporting...

Intra-state day - Export of services - Intermediary Services - Constitutional validity of provisions for determination of place of supply - Zero rated supply -...

Imposition of penalty under Section 78 - Merely because penalty under Section 78 has been imposed for the earlier period, no penalty can be imposed for any subsequent...

Levy of penalty - The original authority did not impose any penalty whereas learned Commissioner (Appeals) has enhanced penalty to Rs.8,40,467/- and such enhancement of...

The Appellate Tribunal found the Appellant Company guilty of contravening u/s 9(1)(a) of FERA 1973 by making payments to a person outside India without RBI permission....

Smuggling - illegal importation of the seized gold - Confiscation of the gold and Indian currency - The Tribunal found no evidence linking the seized Indian currency to...

Levy of penalty under the wrong provisions of the act - proposes imposition of penalty u/s 114, 114A and 114AA of the Customs Act. Order-in-original has been passed...

Levy of penalty - Generalia specialibus non derogant - levy of special penalty over general penalty - the Commissioner perfectly justified in imposing penalty under...

Penalty under Regulations 22 of Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2013 - provisions for imposing penalty were not in existence under the provisions of CHA LR 2004....

The appellant, Container Corporation of India, was granted custodianship as a Customs Cargo Service Provider (CCSP) under the Handling of Cargo in Customs Areas...

Levy of penalty u/s 112 and 117 of CA on CHA and G card holder - mis-classification and mis-declaration of goods - The negligence of both the appellants herein is...

Quick Updates: